In light of the significant media attention about HC MJackson and the possibility of him being removed as the HC I wanted to have a discussion of who you all think would be a good HC for the team.

I personally don't see anyone right now that could bring significant improvement to the team as it is. The defense is the third best in the nba and that is the first time the team has been this good at that since I can remember in my roughly twenty five years as a fan. The good relationship that MJackson seems to have with the players is a very important factor as well.

I read an article about an hour ago of how perhaps Rick Adelman will leave as HC of Minnesota. He is 68 years old, likely too old to be considered, and his first stint here almost twenty years ago was horrible, not all his fault either as the incompetent St.Jean was running things. He is however as successful a coach as I can think of right now of the coaches that are possibly available.

If Rick Carlisle of Dallas is released from his position, he is a very good and well established HC that could do well here.

I don't understand why people want to get rid of Jackson. Is he not doing well? They are probably going to finish with 50+ wins, which will be the third or fourth best season in franchise history. What are the expectations? Do people feel the team should have more wins than they have? Do people feel they should be higher up in the standings than they are?

I think they are a good team with some good players, but besides Curry, they don't really have another player who is an absolute major impact on the game. They have some good to very good players, but to be honest, for the most part they function more like role players. They are team players and I appreciate that. But I just think, if people are expecting this team to compete for a championship, that is unreasonable. They would need an additional player (inside presence) who is a true game changer to have a chance at going all the way.

So I think Jackson's done about as well as could be expected. Is there some other reason they would want to let him go? Is he difficult to work with? Are they tired of the preacher/church influence? I'm just wondering if there might be more going on than we know, because it seems he's done his job pretty well this year. With the level of talent he has, I think he's about right where he should be.

migya wrote:If Rick Carlisle of Dallas is released from his position, he is a very good and well established HC that could do well here.

Is Carlisle on the hot seat? If so, he'd be my pick, but Dallas would be stupid to let him go.

Blackfoot wrote:

loyaltyisacurse wrote:Lionel Hollins

No.

Van Gundy.

But not in spirit, I prefer we stick with Jackson.

Are you serious (real question)? I'd take Hollins over Van Gundy, at least he'd carry the torch on D, but I don't see him as much of an upgrade. Van Gundy isn't an upgrade at all, IMO.

J1000 wrote:I don't understand why people want to get rid of Jackson. Is he not doing well? They are probably going to finish with 50+ wins, which will be the third or fourth best season in franchise history. What are the expectations? Do people feel the team should have more wins than they have? Do people feel they should be higher up in the standings than they are?

I think they are a good team with some good players, but besides Curry, they don't really have another player who is an absolute major impact on the game. They have some good to very good players, but to be honest, for the most part they function more like role players. They are team players and I appreciate that. But I just think, if people are expecting this team to compete for a championship, that is unreasonable. They would need an additional player (inside presence) who is a true game changer to have a chance at going all the way.

So I think Jackson's done about as well as could be expected. Is there some other reason they would want to let him go? Is he difficult to work with? Are they tired of the preacher/church influence? I'm just wondering if there might be more going on than we know, because it seems he's done his job pretty well this year. With the level of talent he has, I think he's about right where he should be.

People feel like we can do better than Jackson. I don't think anyone is taking anything away from him, but we all know that besides a handful of coaches, NBA HC is the most overrated HC position in sports. If you compare this roster to the other rosters we've had in the past 20 years, there's no surprise that we've had a lot more success. My point is that the players deserve far more credit for the turnaround than the HC.

Our expectations are that he calls timely timeouts, does a better job of managing the bench, and that we don't routinely drop 15+ pt leads in the blink of an eye. That last one could also be blamed on the players, but a good HC doesn't let this become an every night thing. I'm not going to pretend that I know nearly as much about basketball as Jackson, but it's pretty clear that we are a talented team and other teams don't let leads slip through their hands nearly as often as we do. That really is the biggest problem - you can go back and pick out around 8-10 losses that should have been wins; games we lead comfortably and blew because of a crappy quarter or half. We could easily be a top 3 seed if half those games finished like they should have.

Same goes for the staggering amount of close wins we've had that shouldn't have been nearly as close as the final score indicated. It's not just because we aren't good enough to blow these teams out, or that other teams that are coming from behind are just better. If that's the case, how do you explain us dropping a big 3rd quarter lead to lose to a non-playoff team one night, then beating a top seed not long after? It's inconsistency, which is the HC's responsibly.

To your point that Curry is the only player to have a major impact on a game, that could be as much of the coach's fault as well. Great teams with great coaches spread the ball. Sure we move the ball around well sometimes, but it's obvious that our gameplan is just a whole bunch of no. 30. Either that, or we start playing Eastern offense where all we do is look for mismatches and iso.

I'll give him these playoffs to prove me wrong, but if we exit in the 1st round, I hope he's bounced just the same.

JREED wrote:People feel like we can do better than Jackson. I don't think anyone is taking anything away from him, but we all know that besides a handful of coaches, NBA HC is the most overrated HC position in sports. If you compare this roster to the other rosters we've had in the past 20 years, there's no surprise that we've had a lot more success. My point is that the players deserve far more credit for the turnaround than the HC.

Our expectations are that he calls timely timeouts, does a better job of managing the bench, and that we don't routinely drop 15+ pt leads in the blink of an eye. That last one could also be blamed on the players, but a good HC doesn't let this become an every night thing. I'm not going to pretend that I know nearly as much about basketball as Jackson, but it's pretty clear that we are a talented team and other teams don't let leads slip through their hands nearly as often as we do. That really is the biggest problem - you can go back and pick out around 8-10 losses that should have been wins; games we lead comfortably and blew because of a crappy quarter or half. We could easily be a top 3 seed if half those games finished like they should have.

Same goes for the staggering amount of close wins we've had that shouldn't have been nearly as close as the final score indicated. It's not just because we aren't good enough to blow these teams out, or that other teams that are coming from behind are just better. If that's the case, how do you explain us dropping a big 3rd quarter lead to lose to a non-playoff team one night, then beating a top seed not long after? It's inconsistency, which is the HC's responsibly.

To your point that Curry is the only player to have a major impact on a game, that could be as much of the coach's fault as well. Great teams with great coaches spread the ball. Sure we move the ball around well sometimes, but it's obvious that our gameplan is just a whole bunch of no. 30. Either that, or we start playing Eastern offense where all we do is look for mismatches and iso.

I'll give him these playoffs to prove me wrong, but if we exit in the 1st round, I hope he's bounced just the same.

Ok, you make a lot of good points. I'm just not sure how much of what you're saying rests on Jackson, or on the players...

I don't think he is a great coach. I think he's pretty average. And I don't really care one way or another if he's let go. But only if they can get a good coach to replace him. I just don't understand how they can have expectations exceeding what they have done. If you are going to have a team that pretty much lives and dies by the 3 point shot, then you are not going to have a great deal of "consistent" play. And this isn't the coach's fault really, the coach has to work with whatever talent he has on hand....

If the team had a great coach, Popovich or someone like that, how many wins would you expect them to have? 55 ? 60 ? I think they'd have a few more but not that many. And they would still have the same issues as far as matching up against the better teams come playoff time. Because I look at the talent on this team, and the lack of consistency. That's what makes a great player, getting it done, day in day out. And Curry's really the only one on the team. I just don't have those kind of expectations for this team. With another great player, yes. But they are missing that.

I would agree with JREED. Jackson seems popular with the players, but there are many grumblings with him. I see him as very average as well. But he isn't so bad. He is more inspirational versus X's and O's.

migya wrote:If Rick Carlisle of Dallas is released from his position, he is a very good and well established HC that could do well here.

Is Carlisle on the hot seat? If so, he'd be my pick, but Dallas would be stupid to let him go.

Blackfoot wrote:

loyaltyisacurse wrote:Lionel Hollins

No.

Van Gundy.

But not in spirit, I prefer we stick with Jackson.

Are you serious (real question)? I'd take Hollins over Van Gundy, at least he'd carry the torch on D, but I don't see him as much of an upgrade. Van Gundy isn't an upgrade at all, IMO.

J1000 wrote:I don't understand why people want to get rid of Jackson. Is he not doing well? They are probably going to finish with 50+ wins, which will be the third or fourth best season in franchise history. What are the expectations? Do people feel the team should have more wins than they have? Do people feel they should be higher up in the standings than they are?

I think they are a good team with some good players, but besides Curry, they don't really have another player who is an absolute major impact on the game. They have some good to very good players, but to be honest, for the most part they function more like role players. They are team players and I appreciate that. But I just think, if people are expecting this team to compete for a championship, that is unreasonable. They would need an additional player (inside presence) who is a true game changer to have a chance at going all the way.

So I think Jackson's done about as well as could be expected. Is there some other reason they would want to let him go? Is he difficult to work with? Are they tired of the preacher/church influence? I'm just wondering if there might be more going on than we know, because it seems he's done his job pretty well this year. With the level of talent he has, I think he's about right where he should be.

People feel like we can do better than Jackson. I don't think anyone is taking anything away from him, but we all know that besides a handful of coaches, NBA HC is the most overrated HC position in sports. If you compare this roster to the other rosters we've had in the past 20 years, there's no surprise that we've had a lot more success. My point is that the players deserve far more credit for the turnaround than the HC.

Our expectations are that he calls timely timeouts, does a better job of managing the bench, and that we don't routinely drop 15+ pt leads in the blink of an eye. That last one could also be blamed on the players, but a good HC doesn't let this become an every night thing. I'm not going to pretend that I know nearly as much about basketball as Jackson, but it's pretty clear that we are a talented team and other teams don't let leads slip through their hands nearly as often as we do. That really is the biggest problem - you can go back and pick out around 8-10 losses that should have been wins; games we lead comfortably and blew because of a crappy quarter or half. We could easily be a top 3 seed if half those games finished like they should have.

Same goes for the staggering amount of close wins we've had that shouldn't have been nearly as close as the final score indicated. It's not just because we aren't good enough to blow these teams out, or that other teams that are coming from behind are just better. If that's the case, how do you explain us dropping a big 3rd quarter lead to lose to a non-playoff team one night, then beating a top seed not long after? It's inconsistency, which is the HC's responsibly.

To your point that Curry is the only player to have a major impact on a game, that could be as much of the coach's fault as well. Great teams with great coaches spread the ball. Sure we move the ball around well sometimes, but it's obvious that our gameplan is just a whole bunch of no. 30. Either that, or we start playing Eastern offense where all we do is look for mismatches and iso.

I'll give him these playoffs to prove me wrong, but if we exit in the 1st round, I hope he's bounced just the same.

Van Gundy is ten times better than Hollins. And Hollins doesn't fix whatever people here are complaining about. You get a good defense, which we already have, and some meh offensive sets.

It's a redundancy. Except this time around the players are pissed Jackson is fired.

JREED wrote:People feel like we can do better than Jackson. I don't think anyone is taking anything away from him, but we all know that besides a handful of coaches, NBA HC is the most overrated HC position in sports. If you compare this roster to the other rosters we've had in the past 20 years, there's no surprise that we've had a lot more success. My point is that the players deserve far more credit for the turnaround than the HC.

Our expectations are that he calls timely timeouts, does a better job of managing the bench, and that we don't routinely drop 15+ pt leads in the blink of an eye. That last one could also be blamed on the players, but a good HC doesn't let this become an every night thing. I'm not going to pretend that I know nearly as much about basketball as Jackson, but it's pretty clear that we are a talented team and other teams don't let leads slip through their hands nearly as often as we do. That really is the biggest problem - you can go back and pick out around 8-10 losses that should have been wins; games we lead comfortably and blew because of a crappy quarter or half. We could easily be a top 3 seed if half those games finished like they should have.

Same goes for the staggering amount of close wins we've had that shouldn't have been nearly as close as the final score indicated. It's not just because we aren't good enough to blow these teams out, or that other teams that are coming from behind are just better. If that's the case, how do you explain us dropping a big 3rd quarter lead to lose to a non-playoff team one night, then beating a top seed not long after? It's inconsistency, which is the HC's responsibly.

To your point that Curry is the only player to have a major impact on a game, that could be as much of the coach's fault as well. Great teams with great coaches spread the ball. Sure we move the ball around well sometimes, but it's obvious that our gameplan is just a whole bunch of no. 30. Either that, or we start playing Eastern offense where all we do is look for mismatches and iso.

I'll give him these playoffs to prove me wrong, but if we exit in the 1st round, I hope he's bounced just the same.

Ok, you make a lot of good points. I'm just not sure how much of what you're saying rests on Jackson, or on the players...

I don't think he is a great coach. I think he's pretty average. And I don't really care one way or another if he's let go. But only if they can get a good coach to replace him. I just don't understand how they can have expectations exceeding what they have done. If you are going to have a team that pretty much lives and dies by the 3 point shot, then you are not going to have a great deal of "consistent" play. And this isn't the coach's fault really, the coach has to work with whatever talent he has on hand....

If the team had a great coach, Popovich or someone like that, how many wins would you expect them to have? 55 ? 60 ? I think they'd have a few more but not that many. And they would still have the same issues as far as matching up against the better teams come playoff time. Because I look at the talent on this team, and the lack of consistency. That's what makes a great player, getting it done, day in day out. And Curry's really the only one on the team. I just don't have those kind of expectations for this team. With another great player, yes. But they are missing that.

You're right in that it is difficult to determine what exactly is on the HC and what is on the players, and it's impossible to say what a "better" HC would be able to do with the same squad. I just feel like we've dropped far too many games in which we should have won or had won. Some of that might be our reliance on the 3-ball, but I don't feel like we're a one-trick pony, talent-wise. We play great D for stretches, much to the credit of Jackson (adding 2 all NBA Defensive-quality players doesn't hurt either), but sometimes we start to get exploited for long periods. I don't know what Jackson should do in those situations, but he should try something, instead he just grinds it out while double digit leads evaporate.

I didn't expect 55 wins, but I did expect 50. Considering that, he's on pace to beat that, but a bigger expectation was for this team to grow and develop consistency. I wanted us to value possessions more, look to try something else when the 3 isn't falling, pass the ball better (this has improved, but we've got a ways to go still), and for 1-3 to drive much more.

I realize that talent-wise, we still have a long ways to go before we are a finals contender, but it's not crazy to think that we could be in the next few seasons. I don't know where we stand now, but through the first half of the season, besides the Pacers, we had easily the best starting five in the league (statistically, not the exact source I was looking for, but it says basically the same things).

Maybe just like our relatively young roster, Jackson will improve himself. I think the thing that scares some of us is that he puts off persona of a stubborn, know-it-all, that is above reproach. The conflicts with his staff don't do anything to disprove that idea either. I hope he feels that he still has some growing to do has a HC.

Totally unrelated to his job performance; he needs to keep his mouth shut about homosexuality. I don't care about the God stuff, because we're all accustom to that being commonplace in pro sports, but he needs to keep the bigotry to himself.

JREED wrote:People feel like we can do better than Jackson. I don't think anyone is taking anything away from him, but we all know that besides a handful of coaches, NBA HC is the most overrated HC position in sports. If you compare this roster to the other rosters we've had in the past 20 years, there's no surprise that we've had a lot more success. My point is that the players deserve far more credit for the turnaround than the HC.

Our expectations are that he calls timely timeouts, does a better job of managing the bench, and that we don't routinely drop 15+ pt leads in the blink of an eye. That last one could also be blamed on the players, but a good HC doesn't let this become an every night thing. I'm not going to pretend that I know nearly as much about basketball as Jackson, but it's pretty clear that we are a talented team and other teams don't let leads slip through their hands nearly as often as we do. That really is the biggest problem - you can go back and pick out around 8-10 losses that should have been wins; games we lead comfortably and blew because of a crappy quarter or half. We could easily be a top 3 seed if half those games finished like they should have.

Same goes for the staggering amount of close wins we've had that shouldn't have been nearly as close as the final score indicated. It's not just because we aren't good enough to blow these teams out, or that other teams that are coming from behind are just better. If that's the case, how do you explain us dropping a big 3rd quarter lead to lose to a non-playoff team one night, then beating a top seed not long after? It's inconsistency, which is the HC's responsibly.

To your point that Curry is the only player to have a major impact on a game, that could be as much of the coach's fault as well. Great teams with great coaches spread the ball. Sure we move the ball around well sometimes, but it's obvious that our gameplan is just a whole bunch of no. 30. Either that, or we start playing Eastern offense where all we do is look for mismatches and iso.

I'll give him these playoffs to prove me wrong, but if we exit in the 1st round, I hope he's bounced just the same.

Ok, you make a lot of good points. I'm just not sure how much of what you're saying rests on Jackson, or on the players...

I don't think he is a great coach. I think he's pretty average. And I don't really care one way or another if he's let go. But only if they can get a good coach to replace him. I just don't understand how they can have expectations exceeding what they have done. If you are going to have a team that pretty much lives and dies by the 3 point shot, then you are not going to have a great deal of "consistent" play. And this isn't the coach's fault really, the coach has to work with whatever talent he has on hand....

If the team had a great coach, Popovich or someone like that, how many wins would you expect them to have? 55 ? 60 ? I think they'd have a few more but not that many. And they would still have the same issues as far as matching up against the better teams come playoff time. Because I look at the talent on this team, and the lack of consistency. That's what makes a great player, getting it done, day in day out. And Curry's really the only one on the team. I just don't have those kind of expectations for this team. With another great player, yes. But they are missing that.

You're right in that it is difficult to determine what exactly is on the HC and what is on the players, and it's impossible to say what a "better" HC would be able to do with the same squad. I just feel like we've dropped far too many games in which we should have won or had won. Some of that might be our reliance on the 3-ball, but I don't feel like we're a one-trick pony, talent-wise. We play great D for stretches, much to the credit of Jackson (adding 2 all NBA Defensive-quality players doesn't hurt either), but sometimes we start to get exploited for long periods. I don't know what Jackson should do in those situations, but he should try something, instead he just grinds it out while double digit leads evaporate.

I didn't expect 55 wins, but I did expect 50. Considering that, he's on pace to beat that, but a bigger expectation was for this team to grow and develop consistency. I wanted us to value possessions more, look to try something else when the 3 isn't falling, pass the ball better (this has improved, but we've got a ways to go still), and for 1-3 to drive much more.

I realize that talent-wise, we still have a long ways to go before we are a finals contender, but it's not crazy to think that we could be in the next few seasons. I don't know where we stand now, but through the first half of the season, besides the Pacers, we had easily the best starting five in the league (statistically, not the exact source I was looking for, but it says basically the same things).

Maybe just like our relatively young roster, Jackson will improve himself. I think the thing that scares some of us is that he puts off persona of a stubborn, know-it-all, that is above reproach. The conflicts with his staff don't do anything to disprove that idea either. I hope he feels that he still has some growing to do has a HC.

Totally unrelated to his job performance; he needs to keep his mouth shut about homosexuality. I don't care about the God stuff, because we're all accustom to that being commonplace in pro sports, but he needs to keep the bigotry to himself.

When he doesn't call timeouts, he's trying to get his team to grow up, to learn how to get the game back under control on their own. To learn how to coach themselves out there. Runs are going to come but good teams with strong leaders can contain them and reassert some level of control.

Their lack of a strong post player is a big factor. It make a huge difference in keeping a team's play steady.

I'm not really that big on stats. I mean, yeah, I look at the box scores like everyone else, I look at individual stats to see what players are capable of. But there are so many other factors that affect why a player is picking up certain stats (who he's playing with, what position he's playing, what types of sets they are in, the team's style of play) that I try not to give them too much weight. Team stats tell me more, and as the cliche goes the only stat that matters is wins.

I agree Jackson's demeanor can be off-putting at times, but, to be realistic, he's just a basketball coach. I can deal with this kind of thing if he wins games for the team. For example, as a Niner fan, I think Harbaugh comes off as a jerk a good deal of the time, but he's a damn good coach and I can't think of anyone else who's available that I'd rather have coaching for them.

Mr. Crackerz wrote:I would agree with JREED. Jackson seems popular with the players, but there are many grumblings with him. I see him as very average as well. But he isn't so bad. He is more inspirational versus X's and O's.

There are better coaches than MJackson and MAYBE there is a problem with his attitude as far as control and wanting to have alot of authority over his assistant coaches, BUT the fact remains that he has been a total success since becoming the coach. Truth is that Meyers has gotten the players on the roster to allow for that success, but a HC has to put it together. This season, the best so far in twenty years, if they win their last game, best in twenty two years, he has succeeded with a fair amount of injuries occurring. Barnes, not much of a factor but the designated 6th man, was injured to start the season, then Iguodala, arguably the best defender on the team and a starter, injured for almost a month, Jermaine, the backup Center with Ezeli out the whole season, out for a significant period of time as well, then Lee injured for over two weeks right at the end of the season. This is also with Bogut hobbled in the last month or so and also Iguodala right at the end of the season, missing games. The starting five has the best win/loss record of all nba teams and defense is the third best there is, the first time probably in franchise history.

MJackson has done well as the HC of the team and to replace him after this season is very risky and only justified if a proven winning HC is his replacement and even then, next season's results will show any justification or not.

Us wanting to replace Jackson is preposterous. If Bogut is healthy we'd probably have been in the WCF last season. Not his fault he doesn't have consistent post play. True there are better coaches but how quickly we seem to have forgotten how shitty we were before he got here.

Now without Bogut, MJackson should be safe if we lose against the Clips. Thing is, Lacob has been supported and quite vocal about it with others when talk has propped up, but he has not been so in regards to MJackson and that may well mean he will be gone. Something to think about.